User talk:KJP1/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive box..... that way →[edit]

All done. When you want to archive in the future, go to the search bar and type in "User talk:KJP1/Archive 3". Open up another screen, this time of your talk page. You should now have two screens open: "User talk: KJP1/Archive 3" and your talk page. Go back to the "User talk:KJP1/Archive 3" screen and you'll see a red link for an article of that name. Click it open and go back to your talk page and copy and paste all threads you want to archive on your current talk page into "User talk: KJP1/Archive 3". Hit save and add the name - "User talk: KJP1/Archive 3" to the archive box in the edit screen of your talk page. Failing that, give me a shout and I'll happily do it for you. CassiantoTalk 15:30, 1 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Very much appreciated. KJP1 (talk) 16:55, 1 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

William Burges (architect)[edit]

You're welcome. I found it by chance when I was trying to fix the links to Saint Mary's. The pages about Studley Royal and Fountains Abbey have had a major reorganisation in the last month or so. It would be really good if you could add something about the church to Studley Royal Park#St Mary's Church and the deer park. You could give the church an article of its own if you have enough material - if you do, you would need to adjust the entry on the St. Mary's Church disambiguation page. CarolGray 18:36, 4 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The material on St. Mary's at Fountains looks fantastic! Is there any chance you could add some footnotes in the text indicating where in the book on Burges you sourced your information - i.e. page numbers. Even one at the end of each paragraph would be good. --Madmedea 19:13, 4 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Actually the same would be good for your additions to William Burges - I know its a pain but it brings up the robustness of wikipedia's verifiability - for help on footnotes see WP:CITE. --Madmedea 19:17, 4 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ooh, you wouldn't believe it but Forthampton is about 10 miles from where I work! Yes that will be a nice day out next weekend. If I get pics I'll put them in the Wikimedia Commons so you can look at them. I take it you're not in the UK. Here is one of my favourite gothic masterpieces - not a Burges, but not everything can be. Almshouses in Aberford, West Yorkshire. I'd love to see inside them but they're owned privately. Madmedea 21:20, 4 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello - I just got your message (from December!). My planting a tiny seed has seen you (and others) nurture a most beautiful plant. I am very impressed! Gedge67 (talk) 09:34, 6 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ABC of referencing[edit]

Right.... here is the ABC of referencing in wikipedia. The ideal thing is to cite every "fact" that you've included - as then if somebody comes along and edits after you it is still clear where each piece of evidence comes from - and it means that every piece of informations is verifiable. In reality, this rarely happens as it is such a pain in the behind and people rarely do it that thoroughly. But to get an article up to "featured status" this is the ideal to aim for. WP:CITE gives you all the basics of your citation options.

Personally I prefer using footnotes with a full citation in a references section. I've just implemented this in Studley Royal Park if you want to have a look. For every work used it requires a full description in the "references" section - Wikipedia:Citation templates can be used to help with this as they format it automatically for you. Then in the footnote you can normally get away with just using the author's surname, the title of the work, and the page the information is sourced from inbetween the footnote tags. If you've been on a Burges bonanza then it might be easier to just make sure you cite from now on and go back and add them in when you get a chance... otherwise you might die of boredom.

I hope you don't mind but I'm going to go into the William Burges page and add some sections and formatting - I'm a stickler for wikification. Feel free to come back with any questions about wikipedia, I've been at this for only a few months - I'm sure you'll learn the ropes in no time. Madmedea 19:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy to help - we're all learning here. I'm just very impressed with someone that knows so much about Burges (love his work). Don't worry too much about tags on your articles - unless they mention the word "delete" it just mean some aspect or other needs fixing. Feel free to ask any questions... I'm happy to help. And just one last tip - for any comment you make on a user talk page like this or on an article's talk page you can sign you name with four "tildes" (the wiggly symbol on the # key - and it will sign your username and put a link to your pages. Madmedea 20:07, 4 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Hendre[edit]

You can upload images from anywhere, as long as they are released under the GNU Free Documentation License (or another license from this list). The easiest would be to upload your own photos so that you're free to release them under such free licenses, but if you write to the Monmouth Golf Club and you can persuade them to release their photos under the GFDL that's also okay. Flyingtoaster1337 01:03, 5 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

P.S. Lifting from most internet sites is not okay, because most people copyright their work to restrict who can use it and how. Free licenses require that anyone can distribute, modify and distribute their modifications of the work. Flyingtoaster1337 01:11, 5 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Hendre[edit]

Thanks. Decided to get some of my old information about TH Wyatt together and put it into order on these pages. Begun to do some cross linking to other pages as well. I have some original material about the Hendre from the local records, all collected as part of a thesis in the 1970s, including some more original photos of not very good quality

Happy to swap views about what would be useful to work on

Uneirlys 08:56, 11 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Thanks for your interest. In 1970 I went through the material on Hendre in the Monmouthshire Record Office. This was for a small thesis as part of my degree which covered some other of Wyatt's work. I did go to Llantarnam Abbey and to Malpas Court.

Looking back my notes are rather thin and I suspect that others have redone some of what I did as the entry in Pevsner for Gwent is reasonably comprehensive. Back then all the notes were handwritten and my photocopies have suffered badly. Got seduced over the last few weeks into trying to get the whole picture of Wyatt together and have been trawling Pevsner and the rest of the net. There still seems to be no detailed biography. I have a call out for the book: Wyatts - an architectural dynasty.

I have set up a separate web store for the material I collect that does not properly fit into the Wikipedia format. It is a mess at the moment but I will give it some structure shortly.

Would be happy to scan and load up material there as I go but may wish to keep it for controlled access rather than widely open until it looks more respectable. The thesis is certainly a bit naive from this long perspective.

Uneirlys 22:30, 5 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ambox warning pn.svg

A tag has been placed on Gayhurst House, Buckinghamshire requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Cabe6403 (TalkSign!) 12:38, 8 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, if you believe the article should remain just add the {{hangon}} tag to the page and write your justification on the talk page. If the page does get deleted or even for future reference try creating a draft in your userspace before hand, see WP:SUBPAGES or simply go to User:KJP1/Draft of article or whatever you'd like to call the page.

Thanks for contributing to wikipedia! -- Cabe6403 (TalkSign!) 12:47, 8 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

At the time I looked at the article you had created it was little more than a sentence. As stands now you have added more content and references, if I had come across the article as it is now I doubt I would have tagged it with a speedy deletion tag.

There is no need to attack my contributions which I felt you did when you said "The notability of an article on Gayhurst House as opposed to, for example, an article on a cocktail called "Quick Fuck" is something we could perhaps both reflect on." I don't know where you are from but that is a popular cocktail in many bars including ones I work in and is no different in notability to Slippery nipple. As is the case with many speedy deletion tags they can be placed on an article perhaps not deserving of it. Should this article meet WP:N requirements then an admin will decline the speedy tag. You would do well on wikipedia not to criticise the contributions of other users especially in an area you may not be familiar with. I tagged the article not on the notability of Gayhurst house but because the article was little more than a sentence when I tagged.

--Cabe6403 (TalkSign!) 14:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Park House[edit]

Hi KJP1,

I have no problem at all with your new edit and you are right to restore McConnochie House to the article. Thanks Seth Whales (talk) 08:10, 14 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

William Burges[edit]


Firstly, weblinks are easy to do: [ The title of the website] (remember to put the http://). Secondly, I'm not sure about pictures. I haven't really used them much in Wikipedia articles before, but you'll probably find some useful info here. Mr_pand [talk | contributions] 09:09, 15 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

William Burges, Josiah Conder and Tatsuno Kingo[edit]


I have added the reference you requested to the William Burges page as follows:

  • Dallas Finn, Meiji Revisited: The Sites of Victorian Japan, Weatherhill, 1995 ISBN 978-0834802889

It is an interesting and useful source for Japanese architecture. Regards --Historian (talk) 23:58, 10 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

October 2009[edit]

Information.png Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Monmouth School has been reverted, as it appears to introduce incorrect information. Please do not intentionally add incorrect information to articles. All information in this encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable, published source. If you believe the information that you added was correct, please cite the references or sources or before making the changes, discuss them on the article's talk page. Please use the sandbox for testing. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Posted By Alex Waelde (talk) 06:20, 4 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]


hey there i appreciate your speedy response and justification. of course i will assume good faith :) i'll admit im still learning too and im glad to see how the article is shaping up. keep up the good work. if you need any help with anything just let me know. Posted By Alex Waelde (talk) 04:59, 5 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Monmouth School[edit]

Hello KJP1, thank you for your message. At a glance, it appears that article Monmouth School has a sufficient quantity of references that a top-page banner template shouldn't really be necessary. I do however see some duplicate references that should be merged. Though I'm unfamiliar with the subject in question, I'll go now, to see what productive adjustments I'm able to make for you. -- WikHead (talk) 08:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've made some minor adjustments which seem a bit more up to speed... and hope you are a bit happier with the article in the state I left it. I will be going back in a moment to make sure I've merged all repeating references. However, if you are really interested in cleaning things up, I would highly recommend that you format those references with cite templates (see Template:Citation for details). Have yourself a great day KJP1, and happy editing! :) -- WikHead (talk) 09:36, 4 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi KJP1. Thanks for the encouragement. I maybe have enough info on him for a stub or a short article but not a lot. Would ie be a good idea maybe to write something and see how i comes out?Cymrog (talk) 18:45, 31 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, just a couple of notes on this edit. I'm assuming JN 194 and MH 93 mean John Newman 1995, page 194 and Hall 2009, page 93 respectively. As the article has a bibliography, when adding citations you only need to give the author's surname, the year of the publication, and page number so you don't have to repeat the bibliographic information again. However, JN and MH are a little ambiguous. Also, if you wrap the citation in referencing code (eg: <ref>Newman 1995, p. 194</ref>) the citation will appear in the references section rather than in the prose. Also, when describing the castle as "magnificent" etc, it's good practice to state who said (separately from the citation) it as it's an opinion. So

His imagination, his scholarship and his sheer high spirits combine to make Cardiff Castle the most successful of all the fantasy castles of the nineteenth century. JN 194

would become

In the opinion of historian John Newman, Burges' imagination, his scholarship and his sheer high spirits combine to make Cardiff Castle the most successful of all the fantasy castles of the nineteenth century.<ref>Newman 1995, 194</ref>

Finally, is that actually a quote, or have you paraphrased it? Nev1 (talk) 23:29, 23 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's slightly paraphrased, but it's a good quote from Newman's text. FruitMonkey (talk) 23:44, 23 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cardiff Castle[edit]

We can't use question marks in an article. We can't ask question , rhetorical or otherwise. It's just not encyclopaedic. FruitMonkey (talk) 23:43, 23 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, we all want a good article. But it must be factual and dry, with opinion cited as such. 'The Buildings of Wales, Glamorgan' is a fantastic start and I would really focus on that as a valid and accepted text. I'll back off for a while, but I will edit where I believe we are adding unencyclopedic references. Enjoy. FruitMonkey (talk) 23:55, 23 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Unfortunately dry is a byword. Anything that can be seen as opinion, ie. anything ending in -est or starting with 'the most...' is constantly challenged. I always stick to the facts, and only use opinion if I can lend a valid cite to back the statement. FruitMonkey (talk) 00:09, 24 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's fine to include opinion as long as it's made clear that it is opinion rather than fact. For example According to Pevsner such and such a building is "the one of the finest examples of xyz architecture in all of Europe". Ideally, an article should be engaging; facts don't have to be dry. Cardiff Castle is an interesting structure and this can be achieved without grandiose statements, and by sticking to the facts. The important thing is to try to keep our own opinions out of articles. Nev1 (talk) 00:28, 24 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Really sound, helpful advice. The grandiose, and self-opinionated, has always been a weakness with me. Will seek to learn. KJP1 (talk) 00:39, 24 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Burges' tomb[edit]

Burges' tomb

Yesterday I was able to get a snap and upload an image - first time I've done this so hopefully it worked ok. At first glance, it looks to be a lined, deep vault, rather than a simple burial. Ephebi (talk) 10:20, 1 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's fabulous. Many thanks. I still haven't managed to get there. Now I just have to work out how to upload it into Burges. KJP1 (talk) 19:09, 1 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're welcome. You just need to include the same instruction as I did at the top of this section ; e.g. the line starting [ [ File : ... in fact, I've just done it myself. Ephebi (talk) 11:57, 2 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're very kind. It looks great, although I must confess to being somewhat disappointed by the tomb itself, which I had anticipated would be somewhat "grander". But I must go someday, to pay homage. Thanks again. KJP1 (talk) 21:33, 2 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

curiously, a lot of the architects and builders at West Norwood built some of the less ostentatious memorials; however, by being shaped low, and with solid foundations, they have ensured that they have survived the depredations of time quite well. Burges' low sarcophagus demonstrates this, as it has survived well in the same shape. With a dozen or more personalities at WNC (see my home page) an architectural visit homage could be a major event! Ephebi (talk) 00:18, 3 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Hendre Pictures[edit]

I've uploaded some new pictures of The Hendre to the article which you might be interested to take a look at! I've also submitted a request to the welsh archives to allow the use of a picture of a portrait of Lady Georgiana Rolls which would make an excellent addition to the article if they agree, I'll let you know the outcome... --Ithundir (talk) 19:02, 31 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The oil is a picture in my grandmother's house, The Hendre was in our hands until the 1980s and she used to visit her parents in law there when the house was in a much better state... --Ithundir (talk) 10:44, 1 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I suspect you actually know more about it than I do, my memories are hazy at best, all I remember is running through the attic rooms at night absolutely terrified because I thought there were ghosts and sneaking downstairs to the library were my great-grandmother would read to me and we'd eat chocolates! I was always in awe every time I visited but haven't been back in about a decade. My grandmother knows a lot and has books on it so next time I go down I'll do some serious note-taking and scanning! It's so good to know another person passionate about the house, all that's needed are a couple of people like us to make it a really great article... --Ithundir (talk) 22:38, 1 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Manchester Law Library[edit]

Its good. Keep up the good work.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:21, 3 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll second that - I grew up in Manchester (and I am lawyer though only practised in London) and never knew it existed! Gentle reminder, please use edit summaries. Thanks. – ukexpat (talk) 16:30, 6 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]



Just picked up you messages - I have been preoccupied elsewhere. I will take a look at your points and see what I can add.

Regards --Uneirlys (talk) 17:29, 8 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Hendre[edit]

Sorry the article sat on the WikiProject Wales page for so long without being picked up, but personally I feel I'm not the best person for reviewing, I'm more a builder. I'm glad you found the review fair, and I really sympathise with the scarcity of resources. I'll keep my eyes out in future. On another point we will need to ensure that the family history part is not word for word from the Archives Wales site to stop claims of copy violation. Slight rewording and citing it will work. FruitMonkey (talk) 20:12, 22 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Hendre[edit]

I was down with her this weekend, pick up some good photos of the house, one from 1900s and another of my grandfather in front of the house in 1983. I'll upload them asap. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ithundir (talkcontribs) 19:39, 29 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


It's mostly a matter of wording; the information is good, but the language is more informal than most Wikipedia articles. I'll try to take a look at it later today; I have to go in a few minutes, and I want to clear out Special:NewPages before I do. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 19:13, 8 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Overstrand Hall has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No assertion of notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talkcontribs) 08:05, 13 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okie doke. Sounds good to me. Thank you for letting me know! — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talkcontribs) 08:10, 13 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No problemo, mate :) I've got no idea what a Lutyens house is, but the references to 3rd party sources assert nobility to me, so it's all good! — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talkcontribs) 18:20, 13 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

William Burges[edit]

Thanks for your kind words on Edward Burne-Jones. Good luck with your GA! - PKM (talk) 23:48, 13 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I have added an infobox to Royal Mill, added geotags, and put a little meat in the article. If you need to do another mill article and there are over 1100 still to do, have a look at my User:ClemRutter/Cotton for a skeleton page and info box and User:ClemRutter/Cotton/doc for a few tips.--ClemRutter (talk) 19:20, 27 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It would be good if – where appropriate – you could add any articles that you create to Wikipedia:WikiProject Greater Manchester/WatchAll—this page is the 'feed' for the watchlist at WT:GM. Regards, Mr Stephen (talk) 21:44, 27 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see you have done that. Thing is, those particular articles had already been added to the list by me and others, my request was with respect to any future articles. No matter, it's easy to undo. Regards, Mr Stephen (talk) 23:23, 27 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, KJP1. You have new messages at User:ClemRutter.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--ClemRutter (talk) 23:10, 27 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I have looked at William Burges (architect) and see the nature of the references problem. So look at a FA article such as the easily remembered Gropecunt Lane, and see how the references was done there. Malleus and POD use Harvard references which I find the easiest to use. I use them on Cotton mill Firstly go to your bibliography and use the {{ }} button to rebuild each of these references with the citation tool. This will be necessary for GA in any case. The you now have two principle tags

<ref name=Bloggs254>{{Harvnb|Bloggs|2004|p=254}} </ref> --for the for time you access the page
<ref name=Bloggs254/> --and each other time. I code the ref name with the author+page, though it is voluntary.

These generate the reflist in Notes, and if you click on them there, you will jump to the book in the Bibiography.

Maybe a bit of a pain- but it becomes quick to use- then if you save your bibliography on your user page you can cut and paste from it to all new pages on the same topic. Have fun. --ClemRutter (talk) 09:39, 28 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reform Club[edit]

[1] Here's some info. Just a thought, would it would be better named Manchester Reform Club? Interesting though.--J3Mrs (talk) 14:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tootal, Broadhurst and Lee Building, Manchester[edit]

Sorry, I did not realise as your references were in a section called notes so I took them to be attachments etc I have removed message. Jamietw (talk) 19:00, 2 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Clean Up[edit]

No problem, regarding the image, it is very strange I can get it to word without it being in a frame with a caption but as soon as I frame it or add a caption it goes. You may want to use the Help Me template and then a support person will get back to you. Hope this helps, if you need any other articles cleaning up just ask, Jamietw (talk) 10:41, 3 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is some kind of problem with images at the moment, see Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) at Image question. Mr Stephen (talk) 11:23, 3 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Church of St Cross, Manchester[edit]

Tutti Frutti, perhaps. Its an absolute riot of diaperwork and polychromy. It makes Street's work look very restrained! Thanks for drawing it to my attention, Ephebi (talk) 10:47, 4 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Christ Church, Moss Side[edit]

Hi there, I've replied to your comments on my user discussion page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Randomfile42 (talkcontribs) 08:11, 9 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Burning the midnight oil[edit]

I think I was in the Land of Nod when you sent your message. Adding as much content as you are doing can drag a bit, but it's all well worthwhile. Regards, Mr Stephen (talk) 07:34, 15 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the Monmouth Church[edit]

Just saying thanks for MonmouthpediA. I think you may be our 20th new article. I'll see if I can help with a few bits. If it gets to be 1500 chars plus in next 5 days then we can get it on the front page. Victuallers (talk) 19:45, 12 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My pleasure. But I can't get the title right, and its therefore missing lots of links to other Wiki pages. I think it should be "St Mary's Priory Church, Monmouth". Despite having written a bit, I'm rubbish at Wikipedia technical stuff. Best regards and good luck with the project. KJP1 (talk) 21:14, 12 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes well done, KJP. I was only asking another editor to have go a couple of days ago. It's a very striking main image there, isn't it. But the angle slightly makes the spire look like it's leaning - is there any way around that? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:30, 12 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You're quite right, of course. A photograph of a vicar is quite an unusual item at a church article. Maybe instead we could use a little sketch?? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:05, 21 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Did You Know[edit]

A good collaboration - thats the best bit! Victuallers (talk) 23:38, 12 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hey You are doing amazing work, thanks so much. please add yourself to the contributors list on Wikipedia:GLAM/MonmouthpediA. We're trying to sort out some sort of automatic points system for when we launch the Charles Rolls Challenge (a competition to reward contributors). We're having some drop in days to teach people wikipedia and general wikimeet in Monmouth in a couple of weeks with tea and cake, if you live in the area you are more than welcome.

Best wishes --Mrjohncummings (talk) 22:20, 13 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, KJP1. You have new messages at Mrjohncummings's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, KJP1. You have new messages at Mrjohncummings's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi KJP. What a great little article. Do you think that {{Geobox|stately home might be appropriate here? I have never yet used it myself, but I see an example at Coughton Court. Just an idea. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:51, 16 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the reply. I was unsure whether such a template might suggest (a) the "home" is lived in, or (b) it may be viewed. I will ask GH what he thinks. Regards. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:25, 16 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DYK for St Mary's Priory Church, Monmouth[edit]

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:04, 19 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DYK for St Mary's Roman Catholic Church, Monmouth[edit]

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:02, 22 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DYK for Market Hall, Monmouth[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

not me[edit]

I agree, but Im not in Monmouth - I should try ghmyrtle/MrjohnCummings and some others for clues to find "stuff" about these Victuallers (talk) 10:41, 26 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DYK for Monmouth County Gaol[edit]

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 28 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well done![edit]

Looking at the burial registers for Burges I noted that Pullan and Chapple were two of Burges' executors; they were unknown to me and in doing a websearch to identify them I was delighted to be pointed back to the WP Burges article. (The 3rd exec. was James Adair McConnedie/Cowedine?) The pages there have really come on tremendously; its really rich in detail and good prose. Well done. Ephebi (talk) 15:11, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
For your efforts on British churches. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:20, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

One thing though, can you please fill out your sources with title and publisher information and not leave scruffy urls? Cheers!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:21, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you like I'd be happy to work with you getting some of your articles up to GA status. I've recently got Bentworth and Llantwit Major up to GA and I have to say it is quite rewarding. We share similar interests with the British/Welsh villages and old castles , churches and inns in particular . Castel Coch and Cardiff Castle are within 15 miles of my house! If you like I can show you how to programme and google books into your wiki itinery so all you do is simply search and then paste in url like I do. Web though unfortunately you have to make a bit more effort LOL. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:38, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A very kind offer which I may well take up. On that very point, you're not interested in the work of William Burges (architect) by any chance? He was the subject that first brought me here and is really my only example of a sustained article. I think it's quite good now; reasonable prose, pretty comprehensive coverage, full of (badly-placed) references, nice pictures; and I'd like to move it from the B Class it's attained through to a GA. But I know there's much more to do, although I'm not entirely sure what's to be done, and I'm quite certain I won't know how to do it. A suitable subject for collaboration? KJP1 (talk) 15:48, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, its an important article which should be at least GA. Just glancing at it a lot of work though needs doing with the sources and structure of it. I will add it to my articles needing attention list (as if there aren't 3 million others LOL). I will give it a read shortly, anyway. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:08, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd really appreciate that. And very happy to take instruction on what needs to be done and attempt to do it myself. But, be warned, I'm a slow learner in the Wiki tools department. Best regards. KJP1 (talk) 16:15, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll begin a list of things which need to be done if it is to pass GA on the article talk page. Regards.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:30, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Eesh, there's a lot that needs sorting with the references first. Once that's sorted I can begin to look at the article! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:55, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're as fast as me with my Monmouthshire Grade I listed stubs! Many thanks for the work so far. The introduction I can certainly do, and will. The use of other sources I will also try to work on but he is a little-studied architect. Apart from Mordaunt Crook's magnificant tome, and some other things by him, there really is only Pevsner, some articles by Mark Girouard, the latest book on St Fin Barre's and some bits and pieces. But the middle item confuses me:

The book names in the citations pf the books already given in the bibliography should all be replaced with the surname of the author. If the author wrote several books then the surname and the year/ or surname name and name of the book

Do you mean I do what you've done with Crook and Murray, i.e cite the publisher? And sorry the references are so bad - I did most of the work on the article when I knew even less about citations than I do now!

And don't do it all! I'll start on referencing all the works and I can do the ISBNs for the bibliography. What are google booklinks?

Format the books like the Smith, Helen (1984). But if you follow my suggestion you can easily access google books and a ref maker with minimal effort hwhich will assist you greatly in every article you write. Urgh Crook I see had two books out in 1981 and his name is Crook not Mordaunt. The The Strange Genius of William Burges entries would need Crook, The Strange Genius of William Burges to distinguish between that and the other book. I cocked that one up, sorry about that! If I was you though I would try to replace a lot of them with varied sources looking in google books here

Thanks. Now I can follow the style you've shown for Helen Smith. Will do. Sorry, it is Crook and the High Victorian Dream and the Strange genius did both come out in 1981, the centenary of Burges's death.

Yeah that will need fixing. But I find it helps if you have the books linked the google books. If you let me know what browser and what skin you use I will instruct you what to do with this:

addOnloadHook(function() {


addOnloadHook(function() {

 addPortletLink('p-cactions','','GB ref','ca-gb ref');

Dr. Blofeld 17:33, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unfortunately, I've no idea what skin I use, if any, and as to my browser, I think it's Windows 7, or is it Google Chrome? I did say I can't do the techincal stuff, either well or quickly!

I think I've got one right!

Yes, that looks fine.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:05, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK I'll assume you use Vector and Google Chrome. Copy and paste the above apart from my signature obviously. All you do is simply paste it into User:KJP1/vector.js. Click edit on it and save and follow the instruction for holding down the reload button, however you got the current programming to work. Tell me if it works, this will make referencing 10 times easier and quicker in the future.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:05, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, I think I can do the bibliography, ISBNs etc. I can do the references for all the buildings and major works. And I can re-write the intro. But that's all for today, my head hurts. I really am very grateful and if we can get Burges to GA it will be a very good thing for Wikipedia and for the study of him - which he amply deserves. Thanks again.

Yes mine too! Its a heavy article I would not normally indulge in! Give me a bell when you've fixed most of the points suggested on the talk page and I'll give it another look. What I'd like to see is most of the major works covered chronologically in the main body of the text, like then in March 1865, Burges commenced work on .... His work showed characteristics of Moorish architecture. In 1866, he was commissioned by Sir William of Gaunt to fatten out his face and so on.. LOL. It isn't neccesary to cover everything but I would definitely try to cover it coherently. I'll look into that myself anyway! Happy editing! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:23, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

P.S. that Murray source is confusing, I gather is was intended to be Crook (1981), The Strange Genius of William Burges ? just in case you haven't twigged with what I was trying to tell you about coding paste a google books url into and click load and see what happens.. Once done you just click "or" by the names to get the surnames to appear first. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:26, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm very glad you made an exception. I think the {{harvid?}} for Strange Genius should be Crook, but then should it not also be for The High Victorian Dream or will that make it impossible to differentiate the two? Anyway I'll crack on with all of this and give you a shout when it's ready for a review. All the best and thanks again.

Definitely. Yes I would format the harvard refs for those two books of 1981 as Crook (1981), The Strange Genius of William Burges and Crook (1981), The High Victorian Dream.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:39, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, the John Murray (publisher) is William Burges and the High Victorian Dream, whilst The Strange Genius of William Burges was published by the National Museum of Wales. I'm lucky enough to have all of these. So, I shall go {{harvid:Crook (1981) ''William Burges and the High Victorian Dream''}} and {{harvid:Crook (1981) The Strange Genius of William Burges . Here's hoping!

I think I fixed it! As I go through ths I will be likely adding content and a lot of new sources. I'll initially use my automatic book sourcing tool to save time, at a later date they should probably be all book formatted with Harvard notes like the others. But getting the sources in and the content is most important first!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:07, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK I'm done for the moment, sorry for any edit conflicts you encountered, you might be a bit alarmed by my extent of editing but I can assure you I tend to work in phases and need to get in the right mood for editing such articles. Once I am, its difficult to stop! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:37, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not alarmed at all, and only a few edit conflicts! I'm delighted you're in the right mood and think we're well on the way to putting this article where it should be. My editing, when it involves Wiki tools, moves at a rather slower pace. Have a good night.

More detail here on his early travels, most interesting. My plan is to use the list and plough through it and try to find multiple sources to construct the bigger picture in the main section and make it more comprehensive. That Strange Genius book though appears to be the finest we have on him which you have!.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:51, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Now that is fascinating! And not a source I've seen. I've got almost everything on Burges, except for Pullan's volumes, which are rare and expensive, and a quite large collection of illustrations of his work, so if you need a reference I can probably do it.

Some of the quotes would be OK in the legacy section I feel but I don't think the intro should talk about his brilliance too much. I guess the one you readded is OK for now. But any such section should have a range of quotes from different authors really for neutrality purposes.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:55, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you wouldn't discuss his brilliance in the intro, where would you discuss it?! Don't worry, we'll get used to our different styles. The article's vastly improved from the position you found it in just a few hours ago and together we can make it something of considerable value. All the best.

Legacy section should provide an adequate discussion of how he is perceived today, his influence and genius etc. But quote stacking from the same author would likely see the article fail. Bare with me, I'll work on the lead tomorrow and start developing it from his early days and making it more comprehensive. If everything goes to plan it might be possible to have it up to GA status in just a few days. There's no rush, but if I'm working on something I tend to work very quickly as you've witnessed tonight. I'm finally off now, feel free to convert the sources in the last three quarters to the harvard sources and move them into the bibliography.♦ Dr. Blofeld 23:12, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As I said, we'll get used to our different styles. But I should stress that Wikipedia GA status is far, far less important to me than Burges, so issues such as quote-stacking from a single source - when Mordaunt Crook is overwhelmingly the most important single source on Burges - worry me less than you might think. Now I'm off too, so you do the sourcing if you have time. I really would like to work with you on this. All the best.

No, I needn't be "off" with it. I can't help but detect some unhappiness over this on your part. I get the impression you think I've invading your article when I most certainly do not have to bother with this. I don't plan on touching much of what you've written at all, its very good but believe me that even if it was never proposed for GA at some point an editor would have come along and tagged it for POV or that the intro needed a rewrite. It's an encyclopedia article not a gushing tribute which the previous intro was. The introduction should effectively summarize the article not be a summary of one's reputation, which the legacy could be. I can restore most of the quotes to the legacy section until we decide what to do with them but I in no way feel compelled to edit this article if you can't trust me to improve it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:17, 20 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've moved most of the original intro to the legacy section. I agree they are mostly excellent quotes and it would be a shame to remove them but honestly they don't really belong in the intro in my opinion. I think the intro should be almost purely factual. The legacy section could accommodate for even more quotes and analysis of his achievements from other authors. Anyway I'll let you decide if you want me to continue on this. As I said I would really like to work with you but its not an easy job editing an article somebody has put a lot of hard work into for obvious reasons. But you have my promise I will get help you get it up to GA level. Personally I believe we could even have a future FA in this, but obviously needs a lot of work. Featured articles require passion and you've got bags of it for Burges, so things look promising! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:29, 20 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

First, thanks very much for your message and your understanding, it's appreciated. Secondly, apologies for my wobble of last night. The problem is I'm too damn close to it. It was what I came onto Wikipedia to write, I took it from a stub to something quite reasonable and for almost exactly five years I've quietly tended it away from the attentions, or interest, of most of Wikipedia. So your energetic approach threw me. But I recognise my over-protectiveness towards it and I also do want to get it to GA. Burges deserves a good article and that status would vastly increase its readership. Therefore, I would very much like to continue to work with you on it. Trusting you is not the issue, I've seen your work, but my closeness is. I shall deal with that.

I very much hope therefore that we can continue with it. I shall plow away following your guidance on the talk page, and you plough away doing what's necessary for GA, of which you are in a much better position to judge. Now FA, wouldn't that be something.

Thanks and regards. KJP1 (talk) 18:34, 20 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I fully understand honestly, that's why I said don't be alarmed last night!! I did have a feeling you might feel a little miffed at some of the edits and start to have second thoughts. I will be happy to continue with it. We have all of the content stored in the history anyway should you disagree. If I'm planning on removing anything I'll let you know first, OK? I actually mostly intend to add content rather than remove it but I envisage some will have to be rewritten to accommodate it. The part about him being eccentric and over indulgent was on the Jones page 48 source, but quite rightly would be more suitable to mention that in the legacy section. Regards♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:42, 20 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Excellent - I'm very glad. Absolutely no need to run anything by me before actioning it. As I said, it's my protectiveness, not a want of trust in your judgement, that's the issue. And, as you say, it's all retrievable if I feel something should go back in. I should say that I'm much more active on here at weekends, the working week tends to contain too much work. Looking forward to developing the article together - and don't hestitate to say so if I stray into protective "POVness"; "gushing tributes" flow rather too readily when I'm writing about "the soul-inspiring one." KJP1 (talk) 19:37, 20 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looking very good. Much cleaner, easier on the eye, some great additional images and some good additional information. Shall crack on with your pointers on the talk page but, as I said, I have less time to spare during the week. All the best.

Have tried to do a little re. bullet 7 on the talk page. Shameless lifting from the other articles but, as I wrote them, perhaps not too much of a crime. More comprehensive? KJP1 (talk) 00:59, 22 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. Yes a lot of it was already written by yourself with some additions by myself but your material is pretty good! If any text is superfluous it can be removed or reworded later. The important thing right now is ensuring it is comprehensive I think. Not that that is essential for GA but it will surely be needed should it ever go for FA.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:53, 22 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK - next I'll reference those unbuilt designs and those works which you haven't already covered. But I still haven't got the referencing right. Shouldn't ALL the High Victorian Dream references now look like Crook (1981), The High Victorian Dream, p. 85, rather than a b CITEREFCrook_.281981.29.2CWilliam_Burges_and_the_High_Victorian_Dream or William Burges and the High Victorian Dream: J. Mordaunt Crook, (1981) page 302? What am I doing wrong?

Yes they should. The Appendix source should be formatted and all linked to the one note, not separately. Yeah what I always do is "bulk" an article, try to cover as much as you can. Then the article can be copyedited and condensed later. It always makes them more comprehensive doing it this way.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:46, 22 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Eesh, there's a lot that needs sorting with the references first." I tell you I shall want another Barnstar when I've waded through this lot!

Nearly there on the references, I think. I'm worried about the three images of Burges. I took them from the web and I think they're all out of copyright but I can't demonstrate that and they're therefore liable to deletion. But they add hugely to the article. Any ideas?

The Cardiff Castle and Castell Coch sections I think need more focus and coverage on actual architecture. You could probably insert relevant text from those articles. I will look into it tomorrow myself.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:34, 23 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Every time I pull something over from the other Burges articles I have to re-do the damn references!

I know, what you do realise you can simply use the replace xxx with xxx tools in the edit panel which will format them all in one go don't you.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:21, 23 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, I told you I can't do Wiki tools. I am doing them line, by line, by line..................................

I know you did so stop moaning LOL!! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:26, 23 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As you are editing all you do is click the notepad and pen icon on the far right (says "search and replace" when you hover over it) and voila you have the replace tool. Seriously if you're telling me you can't work that one out!♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:31, 23 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Excellent work[edit]

I want to thank you and Dr. Blofeld so much for your marvelous work on Burges! I wanted to rewrite, but the High Victorian Dream bio is out of reach. The page looks excellent. Perhaps you should write to Mr. Page for some images for commons? The recent Panoramas of Lost London (9781566490153) feature some beautiful photographs of Tower House. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 01:24, 20 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A cheeseburger for you![edit]

Cheeseburger.png I'll give you a burger for your valiant efforts today and "fighting to the burger" to sort out the refs LOL! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:36, 23 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't need a burger. I need a pair of glasses as my eyesight fails with all these goddam references! But seriously, it's looking good, huh. What do we need to do next?

Hehe. Well the cheese does look plastic.. Yeah its looking good but obviously will need cutting in parts just to be more concise. That will happen once I research them and ensure we're not missing anything! Most of the material is looking very good. I'd say some of the lower section could do with a bit more focus but I'll get to that as I go through it. I;d say the only remaining major thing is to add some information about the actual pieces he designed and what years. I'll help format the sources with harvard refs towards the end tomorrow probably.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:57, 23 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, good. I'll write some stuff on the Cat Cup, the Elephant Inkstand, the furniture, the stained glass etc. You're right, I've plenty of material. I also think, having re-done it in the light of your comments, that Cardiff Castle does need some more, as his "premier" work. I can do that also. And the bloody references, although help here would be appreciated. Now, a worry and a query. I do fear for the three images of him. They add so much but I don't know how to "source" them. I know you've had your own issues with the image copyright zealots. Any thoughts would be appreciated. And the Summer House at St Fagan's interests me. Do you ever visit, given you're not that far away? I have an illustration from The Builder (1880s?) of the Swiss Bridge which Burges built from Cardiff Castle to the Pre-Raphaelite garden in Bute Park. The more I look at it, and at the image in WikiCommons, the more I think the summer house is a section of the Swiss Bridge. But the Commons image is end-on, and a side-on view would really help. Crook says the bridge was demolished in the thirties but was a section re-used? However, all very original research and not Wikipedia, so do ignore if it doesn't get your pulse racing. Strange the things that do mine.

If you have a chance, can you look at references 59 and 155? They're both quotes from Burges's letter of 8 January 1877 to the Bishop of Cork. The letter is reproduced as the Preface to Lawrence and Wilson's The Cathedral of Saint Finn Barre at Cork, on page 13 (unnumbered). But can I get the references to say this!

Have played around with the intro - as well as more bloody referencing - to try to give a context and, looking at the GA advice on leads, to ensure it covers the main points of the article. Is it still too short? My problem is that, when I start to add, I pack it with quotes and "gushing" again. Advise, please.

Intro needs to mention more of his works, have done that..♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:37, 24 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tower House section has way too many quotes. Needs to be more focus on the architecture itself and his style.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:21, 24 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Milton Court and Anglican Church, Mariánské Lázně worth mentioning in the text?♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:56, 24 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Milton Court possibly, because of its interiors. But I've never been able to find out what actually remains. Crook hints that the answer is not a lot. Mariánské Lázně I doubt. I included it in the List of Works for completeness, and because, when you see it, it shouts "William Burges built me!", but it's a very, very modest church, which Burges never saw, and I doubt it has much merit beyond being his. The whole thing is coming along, but you're right, fewer quotes in the Tower House and more about the furniture, glass and metalwork. I'll KBO.

If you don't think the Elephant Inkstand is anything other than completely astonishing you haven't seen it!!!

I'm sure it is but "completely astonishing" isn't exactly the most neutral of phrases!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:51, 26 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looking good!♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:03, 27 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I really think it is. Thanks for your very tactful driving of it. Had I been left alone, it would never have progressed. Now to criticism! You've taken out my "Burges never married." from the "Personal life" section. That was my Telegraph tribute! OK, I'll let it go, maybe. I'm going to have a go at St Fin Barre's now. After that, some tidying, some more referencing, a full copy edit, winnowing out of the verbiage. A POV check. Review of the images - hopefully the images of him are now ok. And what else?

OK, I see you just moved the never married reference. St Fin Barre's ok or more?

Why do you keep moving the photo of Castell Coch to the early life section?♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:45, 28 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, didn't realise you were on. Just playing around with various photos and wanted the opener to have the "wow" factor. But take your point, it doesn't relate to the text. What would be a great image that does, I wonder. I'll trawl the commons but there's less than one might think.

I would put it at the beginning of the Castel Coch section. It seems out of place in the early life section. At least the Arabic room of the Cardiff Castle is mentioned.. Plenty of photos in the article, first section in my opinion doesn't really need one, unless it is something closely related..♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:54, 28 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dr Blofeld - where are you? I need driving on! Shall I do more on the buildings, the furniture, the other works, stop messing around with the pictures, re-draft the intro (no!)? Advice please. Would it help if I sent you a burger? Needless to say, I've no idea how.

Hi, I tend to blow hot and cold over wikipedia I'm afraid. Article looks great, offhand only thing I can think of is the last 3/4 of the refs need book formatting. I'll give it a read shortly and let you know.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:56, 1 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem, Dr Blofeld. I understand how enthusiasm ebbs and flows. The problem with the two unreferenced books is that they're not really books - rather pieces of ephemera I've unearthed, and bought, in my obsessive hunt for Burgesiana. Pauline Sargent's Cartoons is the, very flimsy, catalogue to an exhibition in 1977. It has no ISBN, was published by Cardiff City Council and printed by CSP Printing of Cardiff. And that's it. Google brings up nothing. The Mirrored Sideboard is a catalogue for the sale of the item by Vost's in 1999. A much more handsome pamphlet, it was published by Vost's, printed by Miro, has no ISBN, and seems to bring up one Google hit, to a Country Life article on the sale. And that's it again. So I just don't know how to reference them.

Is it getting near to GA submission? How do we do that, by the way? Again, I am really grateful for all of your advice. It would have languished as it was without your input, poorly referenced, badly sourced, weakly structured, and full of my POV. You've done him proud.

Needs a copyedit first. You've done a great job with the content, exactly what I wanted to see. Your dedication to the article is admirable. In the next day or two depending on whether I'm in the "wiki" mood I'll give it a copy edit and make some additions if I can. Then we can nominate it. I'll ask User:Tim riley to review as he always does a very thorough review and think the article will improve considerably if he does it. BTW if google doesn't come up with them I'd bin them (unless you can verify the information by having it in your possession) and try to replace with another source. Citing a pamphlet is fine.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:58, 1 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Have both items in front of me as I write this. I'm an obsessive hunter/buyer of anything Burges that I can afford. So I can certainly verify them if you tell me how. Alternatively, I can replace the references, as they may be of limited value if few can actually access them. I very much appreciate your comments re. dedication but, in the end, it's all about Burges and Wikipedia. I like the concept of Wikipedia and I love Burges. He's a stupendous architect and merits a suitable article. Which we've created (POV).

That's OK, just the title, publisher and that its a pamphlet will do. Out of curiousity are you interested in getting any of his buildings up to GA status? I'd love for Cardiff Castle and Castell Coch of course in particular to be promoted.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:58, 1 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I should be absolutely delighted to work on Cardiff Castle and Castell Coch to move them to GA. As we know, the buildings and the architect fully merit it - it's only the inadequacy of the articles themselves that are the encumberance. Which is a matter of some shame, given that I've done work on them. I have a plethora of sources. Shall we move Burges up first and then work on the subsidiary articles?

Cool, let's do that then.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:33, 2 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, Dr Blofeld, are we good to go with a GA review by Mr Riley? I'm still a bit worried at Colombo - Crook lists an unexecuted plan for Lahore Cathedral - could Morris have mixed them up?

I will try to give it an edit tomorrow and see what I can do, remind me evening time if I haven't started on it. I admire how you can concentrate on one article like that!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:44, 6 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I can be a nag, an unfortunate trait of which you may be reminded tomorrow evening! Have a good night.

No nudge required! Grand work on extending the sources - looking at the GA criteria, I see I'm way over-reliant on Crook, which you knew. Let me know what else I should be doing.

Yes, to be honest. You rely on the Crook source and quotes a great deal. Its the best book on him but I still feel some of the uses should be replaced with other sources. I will try to get around to the content tomorrow and will see what I can do.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:57, 7 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Quite true. And no need to be reticent about your honest opinion. Crook is the best by a mile, and he is very, very good, and Burges is a sadly under-appreciated and under-studied architect. But I quite accept it can't be all Crook, even his four separate volumes, or it will look too single-sourced. So let's bang on. I'll see what I can do, also. But let's not be too hard on ourselves. Comparing it with other GAs, and quite a lot of the recent FAs, I still think we've made it a damn good article which gives the reader who doesn't know Burges a very good overview of his life, his works and his importance. Not a bad joint effort.

Nominated for GA. I've asked Tim riley to review it. I anticipate a thorough review from him which will hopefully identify many of the remaining issues. There may be a lot to have to address, but I'd imagine you'd be up to the job! BTW I'd strongly advise moving William Burges (architect) to William Burges. He is the William Burges most will be searching for. If you agree I'll get an admin to move it ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:06, 9 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Excellent - and very, many thanks. As I've said more than once, it wouldn't have moved anywhere without you. I shall roll up my sleeves to address Mr Riley's issues - but I will need help. Where do I go to find his comments when he's had a chance to review? Don't worry, I won't rush him. As to that damn Australian politician, I've thought more than once of obliterating his page! Seriously, I do think Burges (architect) far exceeds him for notablity and would be delighted if you could get the switch done. Thanks and very best regards.

Requested a move. Hilariously German wiki has an article on the Aussi politician but not the Burges LOL. We are now William Burges and Tim has reserved the review for a few days time at Talk:William Burges/GA1, so put that page on your watchlist! BTW I started Llanrothal which you might find something to add to. Dr. Blofeld 20:02, 9 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See the interest in the old boy's gone through the roof today, relatively speaking. Is that your GA listing, or your bumping that irrelevant aussie politico off the Burges front page?

Well I have quite a lot of people who watch my work on wikipedia and a lot of people will have seen the GA listing, yeah probably a bit of both. Talk:William Burges/GA1 has begun BTW. I'll be unable to attend to the points today as I'm rather busy but I'll try and help you out tomorrow.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:35, 10 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see you haven't started addressing the review? Are you daunted by it?♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:46, 10 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Have a look now - was out earlier but sleeves now fully rolled-up. I'll have covered all the comments by tonight. KJP1 (talk) 21:50, 10 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Daunted" - Oh, ye of little faith. It's Burges, I could edit all night. But there are a couple of points where I'd appreciate advice - detailed on the review page.

I think the Worc Coll Chapel deserves its own section. Among other things, each of the choir stalls has on its back three letters which together make up the start of the Te Deum in English, viz WEP RAI SET HEE OLO RDW etc., etc., ending up the Provost's stall where the final three letters are GOD. Anyway, have a look at this.... --GuillaumeTell 23:01, 10 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wow, and thank you very much. My order is already in the electronic post. I think you're right, his work on the Chapel requires more than a passing reference. I shall do it tomorrow. KJP1 (talk) 23:20, 10 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've also dug out a 1963 "Victorian Architecture" book edited by Peter Ferriday, intro by John Betjeman (I knew I had it somewhere!), which has a chapter on Burges by Charles Handley-Read, with 6 pages on the chapel (plus a gloomy photo). --GuillaumeTell 01:16, 11 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Charles Handley-Read, the John the Baptist of Burges studies! I would love to work something from him in.
Worcester College now added. Sufficient?
Yes, fine, though I made a small but not insignificant alteration. I'll read through H-R's piece about the Chapel this afternoon and see if I can find something suitable (but short) to add. --GuillaumeTell 11:32, 11 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Indeed not. I'd rather over-stated the extent of Wyatt's contribution! A direct quote from C H-R would be fantastic.

The currency you mean. Not sure either. I've added some more info about some of his stained glass windos auctioned or valued recently BTW.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:07, 11 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could you help show how to do it?[edit]

Hi KJP1, starting to push the Charles Rolls challenge - I have adverts on lot of non emnglish wikis. We should also have quite a few Monmouth DYKs on the front page tomorrow - and have you seen the news about the wifi! Could you sign up here if only to wencourage others :-) Oh and thanks for your support! Victuallers (talk) 15:53, 29 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Really appreciate your comments - it was great fun running through Monmouth's Blue Plaque list adding stubs - some of which have developed into very nice little articles. Unfortunately, I've quite forgotten which ones I created some wouldn't be able to claim my Rolls points!

Template Architect[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, KJP1. You have new messages at Pigsonthewing's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.


Burges articles[edit]

I have dug out four articles from learned journals that you may find of interest. They are temporarily at my personal webspace here, here, here, and here. If you like to download them and let me know, I'll then delete them (for reasons of copyright). Tim riley (talk) 14:35, 11 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

All downloaded. Very many thanks. They look fascinating. Now, do I read them, which will only cause me to put more into the article, to the fury of any hard-pressed editor, or do I try to address your latest comments before the next set arrives?
I'd hang on to them and put anything you extract from them into the article after GA promotion and before going on to Featured Article candidacy. Tim riley (talk) 15:09, 11 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Very sound advice. I think its probably got enough information for GA anyway, just needs rather fewer of my inaccuracies and less of my POV! The photos in the fourth/4th article are superb. I went to the 1981 centenary exhibition in Cardiff as a school boy (I mean I actually was at school, rather than that I chose to go dressed as a school boy) and still have the "Strange Genius" catalogue which is a mine of information. I get the impression you're not a natural Goth but isn't Burges's work amazing?
I refer the honourable gentleman to P G Wodehouse: "Whatever may be said in favour of the Victorians, it is pretty generally admitted that few of them were to be trusted within reach of a trowel and a pile of bricks." I was brought up in Liverpool, a city with more listed buildings than anywhere other than London, and nearly all of them neo-classical. Scott's Anglican Cathedral is the glorious exception - my most revered building anywhere, not excluding San Giorgio Maggiore, so I do Goth – sort of. Tim riley (talk) 15:53, 11 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Very nice indeed. But Wodehouse was writing when everybody loathed the Victorians. Though I have to acknowledge that Burges probably didn't build anything quite as beautiful as San Giorgio Maggiore. As to how his work compares with that of Giles Gilbert Scott, I shall remain silent for fear that you would stop your fantastic review.
Brute! I laughed aloud at that, and shall not be prejudiced thereby. I'll conclude my review either tonight or tomorrow. It really is a top notch article, and once it's been thoroughly reviewed after GA it should certainly feature at FAC. Tim riley (talk) 17:34, 11 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nice words Tim, thanks. Now if we could get everyone of Burges's works up to GA status..♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:36, 11 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Kind words, indeed. It's been made immeasurably better by your review. If it passes GA, I, for one, shall need a rest before joining the Doctor on the Cardiff Castle and Castell Coch pages. Re. the remainder of your review, I may take a little longer to respond as the working week sometimes restricts my activity here. Thanks and best regards.

Burges GA[edit]

Thoroughly merited. Loud applause. I wish I could say you have converted me to the neo-Gothic, but heigh ho!

If you feel like getting your own back for my three days of nitpicking you can do so on an article of mine, Georg Solti, which I have up for FAC here. Don't feel any obligation, but if you were to spot anything untoward I'd be glad to know about it. Tim riley (talk) 18:53, 12 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Excellent. Well your hard work as I said was always admirable on it. Well done!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:00, 12 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I do apologise but I can sometimes exhibit the characteristics of an impatient child. The article is still flagged GA nominee. It there some further process it goes through?

Give the bots 24 hours or so to filter through the system. Tim riley (talk)

I shall certainly have a look at Sir Georg, the very least I can do, but I know little about him and my proof-reading skills are not of the highest quality, as you know to your cost!. And thank you again Doctor, it is quite superfluous to say it would not have got there without your efforts and your understanding. And I should very much like to work with you again on Cardiff and Coch if your interest in him hasn't waned.


Yes indeed whenever you want to start on either of the castles let me know. A break would be advisable right now though!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:14, 12 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree, I'm exhausted. But you know that sometime we will get together to move Burges to FA.

Happy to help in that FAC drive. Tim riley (talk) 20:58, 12 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We could not do it without you, nor would we want to.

Hi, I have just taken a look at this excellent article and read through the GA review expertly done by Tim. I thoroughly enjoyed it. Having missed the boat in terms of comments, can I offer a late one (and small one to boot). I know from experience that image reviews at WP:FAC are strict and it may be one less comment you recieve if you were to swap, from left to right, the image in the architectural team. See WP:FILE and more specifically here for a bit more detail. Congratulations on a good article! -- Cassianto (talk) 22:20, 12 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Really appreciate your comments and very glad you enjoyed the article. Yes, Tim did do a rather marvellous job. Have moved the image as suggested.

Yes, and more congratulations from me, too. I've been looking through the article today and have spotted one or two things that you might want to think about:

  • Section on St Fin Barre's Cathedral, Cork: Carrigrohane, Frankfield and Douglas, County Cork - what was Burges doing in those places? Just visiting, building churches or what? Incidentally, I don't find that the various Lawrence & Wilson reference links to Google Books and their snippet reviews are at all helpful.
  • Dover: Connaught Hall is mentioned in the text, but is lumped together (as Town Hall) with the Maison Dieu in the list of works at the end. Shouldn't it have its own article?
  • Church of St John the Baptist, Outwood, Surrey: not mentioned anywhere in the article, but is one of the Burges churches included in my copy of Betjeman's Collins Pocket Guide to English Parish Churches, South, and see here.
Don't know why I overlooked this one. And there's a good photograph in Commons. Shall set too.
  • Personal life: it would be good (IMO) if the limerick could be displayed in the usual form, viz:
"There's a babyish party called Burges,
Who from childhood hardly emerges.
If you hadn't been told,
He's disgracefully old,
You would offer a bull's-eye to Burges."

--GuillaumeTell 23:39, 12 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Very much appreciated. Your prompt on Worcester greatly added to the article. I shall put your excellent suggestions on my list of further things to do. Best regards.

I took the liberty to lower an image so the text is no longer squeezed and closed a few gaps in relation to the references. I do have one remaining little niggle with some of the references however:

  • If a range of pages are being used as a source, then the page's should be formatted with a pp instead of a singular p. For example: pp. 288-89 etc. instead of p. 288-89. You may want to work through these when you can. -- Cassianto (talk) 00:04, 13 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not a liberty at all. I'm delighted that you liked the article and am very grateful for the improvements. I will add the formatting of references to multiple pages to Tim's list of things that need to be worked on. Best regards.

Before FAC I'd say there is quite some scope for content improvement. It could be finely tuned and made even more comprehensive aside from the minor issues needed. But I definitely see potential of it, but hopefully we can get a good peer review on it. I wouldn't rush into it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:22, 13 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Don't worry, Doctor, I'm not for prematurely rushing to FA. Firstly, I'm exhausted and I strongly suspect that FA will be more demanding - and less fun?; secondly, there are the lesser issues to address; thirdly, I need to learn/practice quite a lot of what I've learnt and, fourthly, you're quite right, there's a considerable amount to do on the content. So we'll take a break and see when we feel like picking it up again. Re. the peer review, shall I put it back on the Architecture project site? All the very best.

Its unlikely to be a few weeks anyway, I'd leave it as it is! More demanding and less fun is an understatement. There are times during FAC you feel as if you're bending over backwards so much you can smell Alf Stewart's burgers in Summer Bay, Australia! You might be interested in Hilston Park in the meantime..♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:29, 13 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi KJP, you will want to clarify, I'm sure, the Grade that Hilston Park is listed at. Regards. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:03, 13 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Started Clytha.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:02, 14 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You started Monmouth County Gaol too!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:35, 14 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No end to my talents! Now, have started Church of St John the Baptist, Outwood, which Guillaume pointed out was missing from Burges (ever attentive to the content). But can I find it on British Listed Buildings On-Line? What the hell parish is the church in? Bletchingley, Godstone, Nutfield - all blanks. Help! But look at the referencing! Have I learnt from you or what?

Is it not in Redhill, Surrey? -- Cassianto (talk) 22:08, 14 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Quite possibly. But BLBO doesn't list it there. [2] But I'm very pleased you responded as I was having some difficulty accessing your Talk Page and I wanted to thank you for your sorting of the Burges images. They look very much better now.
My pleasure! It's a stirling effort and one to be very proud of. It certainly seems to be well on its way to FAC. I adore English architecture and I dip in and out of Sir Edward Maufe from time to time. If you need anything else just drop me a line, I'll be happy to help (if I can!). -- Cassianto (talk) 22:46, 14 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not listed, apparently - probably because of Ian Nairn's remarks in the B of E Surrey vol, is my guess. Anyway, thanks for adding the article.
An unlisted Burges church! What a heresy.
Its Grade II. Still pretty low for Burges.
I've finally read through Handley-Read's piece in Victorian Architecture and notice that he mentions "a gallery for the Marquis of Northampton" about which he knew nothing. It seems to me that (if it exists) it must be at either Compton Wynyates or Castle Ashby Manor, perhaps when Burges was working with Matthew Digby Wyatt. No mention of Burges in the Warwickshire or Northants Pevsners, however. Anything in Crook about this? --GuillaumeTell 01:26, 15 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't know this but shall check in Crook. Compton Wynyates is a rather secretive house, so perhaps overlooked if there. Castle Ashby's a possiblity, reasonably close to Gayhurst House and the connection made thereby?
Castle Ashby Manor it was. Four designs for the decoration of the Long Gallery in 1875. Unexecuted, and the plans now "vanished", according to Crook.

William Burges - Referencing[edit]

Dear Cassianto - really appreciate your work on the referencing, it's not my strong point! Nor can I work out how to leave a message on your Talk Page, so I hope you get this. KJP1 (talk) 06:43, 19 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Some break you're having from it KJP..♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:08, 19 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy to help where I can. I will continue with it over the next few days. Incidentally, to leave a message on a talk page you can click on "Talk" and then "New Section" — see WP:TP. Remember to sign at the end of the message with the four tildes. All the best! -- Cassianto (talk) 13:57, 19 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi KJP. I would much appreciate you giving the architectural description I have added to this article the once-over, if you find a moment. By the way, I also had quite a productive trip to Llanrothal at the weekend. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:23, 21 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Will do, but it will probably have to wait until the weekend. KJP1 (talk) 06:08, 22 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Burges documents[edit]

Hi KJP, I have a few documents which I think you will be interested in and I would like you to take a look at them. Is there a way I can send them to you? -- Cassianto (talk) 22:32, 21 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Very interested but I've no idea how I put my e-mail up securely. If you can tell me how, great. Alternatively, Tim Riley posted some documents in his userspace and I downloaded them, which worked. Any good?
Tim's more of a technical wiz than me i'm affraid. I'm still struggling with the tin opener! :-) If you follow this link and send an email to me I can then reply and send you the attachments. If this doesn't allow then go to "My Preferences" in the top right hand of your screen --- Scroll down ---check the box or add/ change email address. Once you have saved this then follow the above link. This will then enable you to send and recieve email's. If you still have no joy get back to me. -- Cassianto (talk) 17:10, 22 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Church of Our Lady & St Alphege, Bath[edit]

I am much touched at being the dedicatee in pectore of this article. A pal of mine was made a Papal Knight recently, and I shall attempt to catch up with him by swanking about this private dedication. Now, then, Scott diversions notwithstanding, what are you doing about taking Burges to FAC? It's much too fine a piece of work to languish as a mere GA. Tim riley (talk) 18:08, 25 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I second that! -- Cassianto (talk) 18:45, 25 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Don't nominate it yet though, I still have a few things I might be able to add.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:23, 25 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
KJP, could you supply a cite for the flag added to the end line of the Cardiff Castle section -- Cassianto (talk) 20:09, 25 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Done. Where are we to with those documents?
Still no email I'm afraid! Tim is hopefully going to show me how to send a PDF file tomorrow so I can send the pictures over. I will email you again using the WP service. -- Cassianto (talk) 22:10, 25 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Documents - At Last!!!![edit]

Try this link. If it doesn't work blame Tim! :-)

Cassianto (talk) 20:06, 26 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It invites me to join a conference and then tells me it hasn't started because the host is not there! I'll try another e-mail approach.

DYK for Llanrothal[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 01:46, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Henry Milbourne[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 01:47, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Burges - Ancestry[edit]

If you follow [3] it will take you to a free version of what I was looking at. You can view the documents there. Click on "scan" and it will show you the death register. Have a play around with the various dates and see what you can find. If you can't find or view certain things, let me know and I will look on my subscription service. It will be on there and I will send it to you with a citation.

You can cite the death by formatting it like this - William Burges "Index entry". FreeBMD. ONS. Retrieved 27 March 2012., accessed (and then the date)

Copy and paste the above format to a reference on the Burges article. But beware. Ancestry information may prove particularly problematic at FA if not cited correctly. To cite the census try using - Class: RG 9; Piece: 57; Folio: 49; Page: 1; GSU roll: 542565. This is given at Ancestry.Com. If this is rejected at FA, then you may have to delete it as I can't think another way on how to cite it.

Glad you liked it and please let me know how you get on. -- Cassianto (talk) 21:33, 27 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A barnstar for you[edit]

Modest Barnstar.png The Modest Barnstar
Thanks for your recent contributions! (talk) 16:34, 1 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Rolls Family[edit]

Hi, sorry it's taken me so long to get back to you! I see quite a lot of progress has been made on articles on Rolls family members, with some great photos too! Definitely the right idea to spread the history of the family elsewhere, it's great that there are articles for this now. Thanks for all your hard work! Ithundir (talk) 15:36, 3 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 4[edit]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Chevithorne (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Victorian, Jacobean, Red sandstone and Tiverton
Carrigrohane (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Cork
Darenth (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Victorian
Thomas Nicholls, sculptor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Cork

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:21, 4 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pen yr Clawydd[edit]

Is this it? A hunch would be yes, there is probably two of them. I'll look into it more tomorrow. I'd doubt there are two Grade I listed buildings under that name though.. William Burges. Allow me to look over it in the next week. I want to check every building mentioned in it by doing a google book search for it and trying to find any missing scraps which could make it more comprehensive and ensure it is as well read and researched as possible. If you could begin doing this I'd be very grateful and we could check it in turn if you see what I mean. I want to ensure every building covered in the article has been fully researched. ALso google book searching things like William Burges glass etc might turn up more.. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:37, 4 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, that's the one north of Abergavenny which I think RCAHMW lists as Grade I, and not the one south of Raglan. I agree its unlikely both are Grade I listed and I think I've probably wrongly attributed the listing to the Raglan one. Although, as Newman says, the gates are impressive, although the building behind them looked less so. Re. Burges. that's fine. I agree there's more that could be done. But then that will always be true! Regards. KJP1 (talk) 19:42, 4 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, KJP1. You have new messages at Ghmyrtle's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Create the article on the one you have photos for and the location you are sure of and I'll do some pussy footing around to see if I can find evidence of another one. BTW if you have a few decent stubs started let me know. I'd have expanded Chevithorne ‎ for instance and nominated for DYK.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:49, 4 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Will do. I've created, wholly inadequate, stubs for Burges's team, John Starling Chapple, William Frame, Horatio Walter Lonsdale, Thomas Nicholls (sculptor), William Gualbert Saunders, and Ceccardo Egidio Fucigna, all of which would benefit from the Dr B touch.
And can we do anything with the Church of St Peter, Carrigrohane, where you've already worked and which stands out as the only one of his buildings without a decent reference?
As you may have seen, Nev1 says this:
"You're right to question the location, because what's happened here is two castles with the same name have been confused: Upper Pen y Clawdd ringwork at SO457073 and Pen y Clawdd Castle, Crucorney at SO30992009. which the Wikipedia articles references is about the latter site, whereas the former is the one near the village in Monmouthsire." Martinevans123 (talk) 20:38, 4 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think we should now go through the Burges article and google book search each building to ensure we've not missed anything of note out. Perhaps we can keep each other posted of how far we get. I'll make a start shortly. After that, yeah let's nominate for FA.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:15, 8 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dr B - that's a plan. I shall work through tomorrow and let you know how I'm getting on. You're certainly right that there will be more we could add but I don't think we've missed anything of great significance. I thought about adding more to the stained glass and furniture sections, particularly with the stuff Tim sent me, but I'm now worried it's getting too long and we'd face the criticism that it should be sub-sectioned. As it is, I think it nicely illustrates his importance in all the subsidiary areas, without drowning the reader in just too much detail. So let's see how we progress next week and then, would you be kind enough to nominate it? Best regards. KJP1 (talk) 23:07, 8 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm of the opinion we should google book search as many Burges buildings and things as possible and ensure the article is definitely as comprehensive as possible first. Like I did yesterday. Its not so much detail, its just ensuring it is fully comprehensive. Then we can worry about shortening it, which shouldn't too difficult to do. I think we could cut back on some of the quotes for a start...♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:31, 9 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just for info: it should be "Pen y Clawdd"; "y" in front o f a constanant, "yr" in front of a vowel. "y clawdd" but "yr Aifft" (Egypt). "Pen" means "head" or "top", "clawdd" is a "boundary" or "fortification". "Pen Clawdd" is a village in the Gower Peninsula. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 05:57, 11 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Buildings and structures in Monmouth[edit]

As per my Talk page, I've ceased recategorising articles, and am asking for iscussion on Category talk:Buildings and structures in Monmouth.--A bit iffy (talk) 22:18, 4 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Proposal: subcategory for Monmouth buildings/structures[edit]

I have suggested a new subcategory Category:Buildings and structures in Monmouth. Discussion is at Category talk:Buildings and structures in Monmouthshire.—A bit iffy (talk) 17:26, 6 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It now appears the proposed category does exist, but with a slightly different name of Category:Buildings and structures in Monmouth, Wales.—A bit iffy (talk) 18:29, 6 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi KJP1: Autopatrolled was requested for you at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled by Gilo1969, basicly because the new page patrollers do not think they have to patrol your pages, and can trust you to make a good new page. The bit does not allow you to do anything, but is a convenience for WP:new page patrol. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:26, 4 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DYK for Ganarew[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 09:34, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for King Arthur's Cave[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 17:19, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 11[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Church of St Peter, Carrigrohane, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cork (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:58, 11 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Worcester College Chapel[edit]

Thanks for the note. I really ought to get a copy myself and will do so post-haste. I was pondering the chapel this afternoon. Pevsner says that the Evangelists are by W.G. Nicholl - William Grinsell Nicholl, a sculptor who needs a WP article [4], whereas somewhere else (Handley-Read?) I saw that they were by Nicholls. Nicholl certainly carved the lectern and, I think, the candlesticks, and he had worked on the Ashmolean Museum with Charles Robert Cockerell - and also at ... Waltham Abbey, according to Rupert Gunnis, who has a comprehensive list of his works. (More here).

I was in Cardiff ten days ago for the Mariinsky show at the Wales Millennium Centre and took a rather rushed tour round the Castle which I hadn't visited for some years. Wowee! --GuillaumeTell 21:02, 11 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rolls yr Hendre, Family Tree[edit]

Can you take a look at this page please, and leave any comments you may think fit. Thanks. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 05:21, 13 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bore da! I've started a new article here on the Rolls family, as you suggested. Please change or suggest any amendments. Thanks for the inspiration! Llywelyn2000 (talk) 03:25, 17 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
All done: The Rolls Family, Monmouth. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 09:38, 23 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can you find anything on this dead house? I've started The Doward BTW.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:56, 13 April 2012 (UTC) Mmm yeah that looks like it, but it was demolished, so maybe a new one was built, it looks further south than opposite Leys which I think was supposed to have been about 50 yards further north. Feel free to add, I got Newton Court wrong though its on the left side of the road and river.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:09, 13 April 2012 (UTC) Yes the area is called Hadnock, the hamlet is Little Hadnock. I'd say it constitutes its own article! Its astounding how we're getting information on every square kilometre in this area!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:47, 13 April 2012 (UTC) Looks like it, yes. The way the sources are worded implies the former house demolished in 1822 was located further north practically opposite Leys, about 50-100 yards further north.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:06, 13 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Have reworded to indicate the article covers 2 buildings, as I think it does, and added some references. Hope this is ok. Don't know what on earth has happened to my Reflinks Tool. It just causes havoc. Shall have to re-install but in the meantime you'll have to fix the bare references.
KJP - exactly the same thing happnens when I do Reflinks. But then, I did see my laptop on tv last week. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:36, 13 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree, I was only thinking the same think last night. But it ought to be peer reviewed first surely? I'll see what Tim thinks. I still wants a few hours on the article though. BTW just because reflinks doesn't work doesn't mean it is acceptable to leave bare URLs!! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:31, 19 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think you're underestimating just how long and lugubrious FAC is. Its April 20 and if you're going away in early May it definitely would still be ongoing. Most FACs from what I've seen last at least a full month, certainly a lot longer than 10-15 days in general! I think we should nominate it when you return. By then I hope to have improved it further anyway.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:01, 20 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So I saw! I can only imagine the chuckles from the Morgan family... Benbristol 00:25, 19 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 19[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Hewell Grange, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Victorian and Red Sandstone (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:45, 19 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DYK for Hadnock[edit]

Materialscientist (talk) 16:06, 20 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have anything on Velindre House in Whitchurch, Cardiff?♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:24, 21 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

'Fraid not. If it still exists it's on the site of Whitchurch Hospital, which you'll probably know. It was owned by a Thomas Booker, colliery owner, in the later 19th century. It's not in Newman and I can't find it on any of the usual listing sites.

This [5] says Blakemore, of Velindre House, was High Sheriff in 1820.
And this [6] gives them both a mention.

I'd expected it to be a major house, its like a small detached house, I found it on google street view! Probably not worthy of an article at least architecturally it is as normal as they come!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:21, 22 April 2012 (UTC) I nominated Kilgwrrwg but it needs another 500 bytes. Can you find a bit more?♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:24, 25 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Certainly, but it'll have to wait until tonight. Give me until then.
User:Ghmyrtle's added loads. You must be way over the limit by now.

I'm going to work on it tomorrow with a clear head, I got sidetracked today and can't concentrate too much on it right now. Then yeah, nominate within the next few days. Hope you had a nice break!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:48, 21 May 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Excellent. I hope your head is clearer today. Did the , rare, sunshine lead you to take one Pimms too many at lunch? I'm now looking forward to the FA process which I'm sure will enable us to make some real improvements to the article. Let me know when its nominated and whether you need me to do anything before then. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 05:56, 22 May 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've made some additions and edits. Go ahead and nom once you'd addressed the clarify and vague tags I've added and sorted out the bare urls I mentioned below. If I was commenting on the FA I would have mentioned them.. I can still spot some things which I think will be picked up on at the FAC. I personally think there are still too many gushing quotes by Crook, particularly in the lower sections. Also one or two sources need checking you use to reference William Burges gallery in APril 2013 but the source makes no mention. There should be no bare url linked sources, they should be formatted with Template:Cite web. If you can address these. I'm not entirely convinced the prose in part flows as well as it could and is quite up to FA standards quite yet but I might be phased by past experiences where the standard expected at the FAC was beyond ridiculously high. Overall having read it thoroughly today though I'd say it is now close enough to open a FAC. But be prepared to slog your guts out at the FAC...♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:21, 22 May 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Earth to KJP1. Are you going to nom?♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:10, 30 May 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hehe, this time next week things might look different!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:11, 6 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Indeed, and its just getting started. Expect more critical, borderline nasty comments at some stage. Doesn't always happen but always used to. Certainly expect criticism. At some point in my experience the FAC always reaches a point where you think "I'm bending over so far I'm drinking a Foster's at a bar in Cairns", people are expecting perfection". This has started very promisingly though so it may not happen that way. But its definitely very tough. Yeah if you could speak to Tim about that. I'll gradually plough away at the other comments over the next few days..♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:05, 7 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Its within our sights though and achievable as I said. If I hadn't have seen the potential that it could actually reach the top level I wouldn't have said so. I've addressed all of Tim's and Cass's points but I'll leave the quote sorting to you as you added them! It would be a good idea though to keep on top of the comments we get, otherwise if we leave it until several other have commenting it might seem more overwhelming. After this of course I want to work with you on getting Cardiff Castle to FA. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:04, 8 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My feeling is that yeah quotes should be attributed, so good work on that. But I also agree with Cass in that there is one quote too many and we could cut back on a few. I did say remember that the quotes might be cause difficulties at FAC. Maybe remove a few of them as you address them?♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:50, 9 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll try, and I have taken one out. But every deletion is a knife-wound to the heart!!! KJP1 (talk) 14:54, 9 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Excellent. Hokay medieval it is.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:48, 9 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, best to keep on track with the comments, seems less daunting then. Can you check the Burlington magazine sources. I spot two from JSTOR and one which says something like page 55 of the burlington Magazine. Are they all the same source?♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:31, 10 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah strike em all out which are done, and in future we should strike out immediately once done. This FAC is actually going well, no unpleasantries or disguised insults as of yet.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:15, 10 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can you find the url for ref 189 "Bedford Borough Council website, February 2011"♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:17, 10 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Added as bare URL which needs fixing. Glad it's going well! Might need advice on how to strike through text. KJP1 (talk) 13:34, 10 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Correction - I do need advice on how to strike through text. KJP1 (talk) 13:41, 10 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just click edit on the FAC and see how it is done with a <s> and </s>.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:53, 10 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. Now much clearer as to what remains to be done. KJP1 (talk) 14:21, 10 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I know!! I think i can still improve it a little further. Some of the longer quotes may be suited to side quote boxes. Providing they aren't cluttered with images of course. in my own opinion some of the sections are still not quite as strong as they could be and need reinforcing. Especially Park House.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:44, 10 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No prob.s, I can beef up Park House, and any others you think need doing. I like the quote box against his churches. It looks very good and I agree that some more, with some of the longer quotes, would be very pleasing indeed.

Yeah, obviously its close to FA now, but I always like to make it as good as possible even with support. If you have some suitable longer quotes to go in the first half of the article. Especially Cardiff Castle and Castle Coch, there are probably some great quotes, although best not all be by Crook!. Don't want to clutter it too much though, some of the paragraphs without images could have a few quotes maybe. I'd also like to see one or two more quotes by Burges himself as I feel they are valuable. Maybe another 3-4 quote boxes, so long as they odn't interfere with images or bloat it as I said, they would have to be strategically placed. Yeah, Park House I think needs beefing up with architectural details. Does CADW have a PDF with details like I added to Hilston House? (which passed GA BTW this avo.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:16, 10 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fine - I'll look for a couple of good Cardiff quotes, beef up Park House, do another check of the references - I've noticed a few more that aren't links - and ask User:Nikkimaria about what are now Footnotes 185 and 265, where neither of us can work out what the problem is. Incidentally, I agree that further improvement is always valuable and, if I undertand FAC, which I may well not, isn't the timing out of our hands now? As I read it, the admins now decide when, if ever, the consensus on FA is reached. Now for supper.

Park House and actually Tower House could do with more on the actual exterior architecture I think.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:50, 10 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Excellent work, the article with your additions on Park and Tower House and review comments has improved it further.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:25, 13 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you. Yes, I think it's coming along nicely. As you said, Park and Tower Houses did both need a bit more, but I think they're ok now. A couple of things:

  • User:GuillaumeTell has promised he'll try to get his final batch of comments today so I'll respond to them when received. He really has done an excellent job.
  • Can you Reflink 133. I wish I knew what had happended to my Reflinks tool. It was so helpful and now it just blanks everything.
  • Can you check the quote box for Knightshayes. Neither I nor User:GuillaumeTell can work out who Mallory is and did he really have a boudoir?
  • I haven't had a reply from User:Nikkimaria on the 3 outstanding formatting queries, or the point she raised regarding listing sources from the same author, which neither you nor I could fathom. Should I chase her? She seems rather important, BTW.

Apart from that, we do seem to be in pretty good shape. What do we do now - wait around for more comments? KJP1 (talk) 16:52, 13 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well done for getting a picure. I have never seen it before. Had you thought of cropping it down to remove some of the molehills? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:48, 1 May 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alternatively, there is this one at geograph: [7], which I suspect may have been taken from a similar vantage point, with a zoom (or has been cropped down). Martinevans123 (talk) 21:58, 21 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DYK for Kilgwrrwg[edit]

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:04, 19 May 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I wish someone would sort out who gets the credits for these DYKs. By my count, you added 2532 bytes to the article, and I added 3615. Bah humbug!! (Not that such trivialities matter, of course!) Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:14, 21 May 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Links to sub-paragraphs (or something like that)[edit]

Hi. Suppose you want to get a link to a sub-paragraph - here we go (using a Burges example):

  • You're aiming for a link to a sub-para of French Gothic architecture
  • Have two iterations of Wikipedia in separate tabs up top - use one to try out these instructions and the other to show what results will be produced
  • Having got the French Gothic architecture article on your screen, look at the Contents box below the (rather vestigial) lead.
  • Click on the sub-para in the Context box that you want to include as a link in your article - in this case, 2.1 Early Gothic
  • This should produce:
a) a header entitled Early Gothic but also:
b) up at the top of the screen, following the Big W (reminds me of It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World), the beginning of the URL, i.e. [[]]
  • Now you have to get rid of the - for this purpose - beginning of the URL. Keep the square brackets but delete the bit after them, i.e. the bit that says
  • That should leave you with French_Gothic_architecture#Early_Gothic
  • Use the above link in the article.
  • Gosh, it looks very complicated, but you can keep experimenting and pressing the "Show preview" button down below until you end up with the Real Thing.

Feel free to contact me if anything goes wrong... --GuillaumeTell 00:13, 10 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Very helpful, although, as you say, it sounds complicated. No doubt it'll be simpler when I try it, but thanks for doing the two you spotted in Burges. And thanks again for your comments. Really very helpful and have added much to the article. I hope you're ok with the details and dates for Worcester College now - Gillingham was helpful as to what exactly is left of Burges in the Hall. Have you got a copy yet - it really is beautifully illustrated. Sometime, I must go and see it for myself.
Yes, I've gone through the Worcester College bits. Haven't got round to ordering Gillingham but will do so soon. The College is publishing a book about itself in 2014, which will be the 300th anniversary of its creation - rather recent for Oxford! - and, ahem, the 50th anniversary of my matriculation there, which shows my age a lot! And I saw and loved most, maybe all, of Sergeant Bilko on TV in Kenya in the early '60s. --GuillaumeTell 11:04, 12 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Have just ordered Gillingham (sometimes I do things decisively, but not very often). I see that she is the spouse of the last Provost. Should finally finish comments tomorrow, tho' not before about 3pm. Best. --GuillaumeTell 23:24, 12 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
P.S. I think your using, and my recognising, the Big W from MMMMW shows our age a little. Phil Silvers is terrific! KJP1 (talk) 14:25, 10 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
pps - what more could you expect from the man who brought us Sergeant Knocker! -- Cassianto (talk) 07:34, 11 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Goings on at the British Library[edit]

"My real focus is pre-WWII, Asquith, L-G, Baldwin etc. but I can cover more modern figures too," you note. We'll miss you at the editing jamboree on WW1 at the British Library a week today. [8]. I know little about the battles but am turning up to add anything I can on the politics, and perhaps the poetry. Tim riley (talk) 21:39, 10 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Burges: list of sources etc[edit]

  1. There's a page number in the Weinreb ref that I think should be removed from this section, as it's in the proper place in the "notes" section.
Done. KJP1 (talk) 21:31, 13 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  1. Your recurring note "no ISBN" is not comme il faut: see WordCat for OCLC numbers which should be quoted instead. For instance: this (scroll down the page to find the OCLC number).
  2. Images: since I last looked in you have added a lot of images and quote boxes. I find, in particular, the twin image of Burges and Bute too big for comfort. I suggest you resize it to match the one above it.
Done. KJP1 (talk) 21:31, 13 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have a horrid suspicion that these comments really ought to be on the FAC page, but I recoil from putting my oar in there yet again.

Yours, Anonymous Neo-classicist. Tim riley (talk) 19:28, 13 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tim, your oar is always welcome. I'll look at these tomorrow but, for now, I'm exhausted with the soul-inspiring one. I hope your WWI weekend goes well. KJP1 (talk) 21:26, 13 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can't leave it alone. I'll look at the "no ISBN" issue tomorrow - but I'm likely to need help. KJP1 (talk) 21:31, 13 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mallory. means Heathcoat-Amory of course, maybe its a printing error? I like the quote though and think its productive.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:42, 14 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bare URLS for web sources. When you click edit you'll see a prove it ref at the bottom right. CLick "add a reference, Paste the url in there and fill out the form, it will help you draw up a full ref.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:58, 14 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Stained glass section could do with a few examples of his works, especially those he designed not for buildings he worked on. I feel it needs a bit more and a bit more analysis of his style etc?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:20, 15 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You could add the quote under the first Cardiff Castle image. As for Castell Coch quote mmm, I would remove the picture on the left and put it there? I think it would be too cluttered otherwise?♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:50, 17 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Both sound good. You want me to try and put in a quote box! Could be messy.

Just copy and paste an existing one, look how its set out, and simply replace it. You'll see it says either left or right at the top, your choice.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:34, 17 June 2012 (UTC) Hopefully it won't go on much longer. But you see the tenacity that is required to achieve FAs. And that's why I stopped contributing to FAs as I thought me time spent on the minor edits "perfecting" it would be better spent on much more lacking articles. But working with you, you have the passion to see it through.♦ Dr. BlofeldReply[reply]

Burges references[edit]

As you can't quote something that doesn't exist I'd explain the facts on the FAC page. That should do, I think. Tim riley (talk) 13:38, 17 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the thanks ...[edit]

...I enjoyed working through the Burges article and trying to improve it a bit. I've just got back from a trip to Birmingham (strangely not in my copy of Crap towns but maybe it's in the 2nd vol) where I spent a bit of time in the Art Gallery. In one of the pre-Raphaelite rooms I came upon a very nice side-table by Burges (one of a pair, apparently). It actually looked a lot older than the Victorian era - maybe renaissance Italy? - not that I'm an expert on such things. I asked the lady at the shop there if there was a postcard of it but, alas, there wasn't. She said that it would be OK to photograph it but I didn't have a camera with me. Oh well! Good luck with the FAC. Best. --GuillaumeTell 18:13, 17 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WikiProject Country Houses[edit]

I was wondering if you or you know anybody who'd be interested in such a project. One of my chief loves is British country houses and I don't at present see a project set up to help coordinate it and to collaborate over. If interested let me know and I'll consider making a proposal.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:54, 19 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I had expected a few more people to comment at the FAC actually but the amout of "issues" needed addressing is exactly what I'd anticipated. You see now why I usually refrain from nominating articles for FA as alone I would not have the willpower to make so many minor edits. I hope somebody will pass it in a day or two as I agree its starting to get wearing. Your efforts to answer all concerns are almost superhuman.♦ Dr. Blofeld 23:14, 20 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wearing is NOT the word. But I am so very grateful for your support - as I have indicated on the FAC Project page. From your co-author. KJP1 (talk) 23:18, 20 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've concluded the reasons it didn't get more comments is that, firstly, it's an esoteric subject, and secondly, it's so damn good! KJP1 (talk) 23:52, 20 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Leno's 2012 début[edit]

Thank's for the message. I will always make time for Burges, whom I feel, will be making his appearence in the not to distant future . -- CassiantoTalk 07:07, 21 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Take a gander at User:Crisco 1492/common.js. What you need to do to see the script is copy importScript('User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js'); to your common.js page here. That will cause mistakes in the Harvard referencing to leap out at you. Remember to clear your cache after installing it though. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:12, 21 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Featured article[edit]

Loud cheers! Warmest congratulations on Burges's elevation. Tim riley (talk) 08:20, 21 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Blimey! I didn't see that. Congratulations on a much deserved FA article (and for the kind mention in your acceptance speech :-). -- CassiantoTalk.
Hear, hear! And I also echo Dr B's comments - superhuman indeed. BTW, browsing around the Burges stuff in the Victorian Web (whose pictures, I see, are freely available for projects such as WP provided appropriate credit is given) I came upon this magnificent monument. --GuillaumeTell 10:29, 21 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, congratulations, KJP. A superb article. ".. an atrociously rich Gothic swine"? - sounds a bit like this monument Martinevans123 (talk) 11:16, 21 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see I added the article to the wrong section of our FA page [9], sorry about this. I have deleted my entry. Congratulations. Graham. Graham Colm (talk) 21:31, 22 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nicely done.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:17, 24 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

Tree FA.svg The Featured Article Contributor Barnstar
Congratulations on your first Featured Article and showing tremendous tenacity and perfectionist traits to capitalize upon the potential I envisaged and building the article in exactly the way I had suggested. Who would have thought that almost exactly 4months later it would achieve FA status.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:20, 21 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cardiff Castle to GA next? Has this put you off FA then, or will it become your goal to get all of Burges's building up to FA status and create a featured article topic about them all? In regards to country houses I think I'll set up a project page under WP:Architecture later. I'd best give them a bell about it first though.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:21, 21 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

By the way you've been evading it when I mention Cardiff Castle or working on more I get the impression you've had enough of wikipedia now!♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:51, 21 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Eh, it might be at least 2 years before Burges is featured on the front page. Kiarostami took 5 years to hit the main page.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:17, 21 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Abbas Kiarostami took 5 years to hit the main page! The average article probably takes 2 years, you should enquire. Either way its gonna be a long long time before you ever see it on the main page. There's 3500 other articles to compete with. Take a well earned wikibreak anyway and the offer still stands to bring Burges's building up to GA status even if not FA.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:35, 21 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Glad to hear it, sorry you didn't realise that though. I've nominated the Castles article for GA, I see FA potential.16:05, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Congrats on a nice article. Please see here. I'm not criticising the article per se; my concern is the values of the FA-process itself. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 16:56, 24 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have run across this editor recently. I had to revert his/her wholesale edits to an article made in defiance of WP:CITEVAR. I hope you will not be put off making further contributions to Wikipedia on account of such representations. Tim riley (talk) 18:09, 24 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dude, newbies are the sweetest. Just go agitate a little at TFA and they will put your article up very soon. Queues are for wheels that don't squeek. Go get your first article on the front page.

And, um...Caerphilly. Um and the Pembrookshire Coast. Reminds me of this book I read when on a liberty break in Wales. Some historian dude. He was even pro Welsh. But he had a funny comment about "when WAS Wales"? Then the mind wanders to Lloyd Alexander (not Jimbo). (talk) 21:07, 24 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I suggested "him" for his birthday, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:51, 10 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Recent changes[edit]

So pleased that the recent flurry about citations hasn't put you off. I shall go and try to make my peace with the editor in question. Meanwhile I am plotting to put you off much more seriously, as I'm working on Giles Gilbert Scott, and will be seeking to lug you into those murky Mersey waters, but not yet! More anon, beware. Hahahhaaah! (Mad post-neoGothic Scouse cackle.) Tim riley (talk) 18:55, 25 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note from Wikpedia administrator: User:Tim riley expired quite unexpectedly, foaming at the mouth and babbling of green fields without Victorian buildings. Did you know that Giles's loony dad, Sir Gilbert's son, died in the Grand Mad Midland Hotel at St Pancras? One can hardly blame him. But I was wowed by the middle Scott's Norwich RC cathedral (as it is now) - the interior, anyway. The exterior is revolting, but the inside is magnificent – even measured against pretty serious competition from God's own cathedral down the road. Tim riley (talk) 19:25, 25 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Andromeda (constellation) passes on June 2, and is today's FA. 5 weeks. So never say never!! That has to be a record though. Haven;t seen you around of late, hope you are still interested in Cardiff Castle and Castel Coch.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:54, 12 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, very impressive indeed. Still enjoying my wikibreak at the moment but shall certainly drop by at some point to suggest we kick off Cardiff Castle and Castell Coch. When I do, shall we start with Castell Coch? I rather fancy it will be a little easier, if only because its history is a fraction of the length of the other. Very much liked Shirenewton Hall by the way. I fear they don't do open days - the nearest I've got is standing outside the, rather gaudy and over-ornate, gates, from which one can't see the Hall at all. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 17:44, 15 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Look forward to your return.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:18, 19 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ave atque vale[edit]

I am sending this note to Wikipedians with whom I have most closely collaborated over the last six years or so. After pondering hard during a month's wiki-break in July I have sadly decided to withdraw fully from contributing. I have been worn down by continual carping, sniping and belittling from a wearisome few (you know the sort of people I refer to); the joy has gone out of taking part in this wonderful enterprise. I should be more resilient, but alas it's finally got to me.

Working with you has been a pleasure and a privilege: I count myself fortunate to have had such colleagues. My warmest wishes go with you for the future. I shall be happy to do any research, copy-editing, fact-checking etc you may ever feel inclined to ask me to do – but safely offline.

With my very best wishes,
Tim. (Tim riley (talk) 16:06, 10 August 2012 (UTC))Reply[reply]

Tis OK I returned today, it was only my intention to just pass by this morning. Sometimes you need a day or two away. I never thought Tim would fall victim, its a tremendous loss. I was counting on him to review Cardiff Castle at a later date. Its disappointing that he didn't rate us and those others he enjoyed working with highly enough above the wiki nasties but if he was worrying too much about it and it was literally affecting him then I understand but I hope it isn't permanent. That catalogue sounds good, perhaps you could scan em in and upload to the commons, should be public domain?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:56, 15 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just to let you know, I nominated the article for DYK here. I've also cleaned up the links a bit. I think Tim would have wanted it to be shared. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:30, 12 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Indeed. I noticed the reflinks tool didn't work very well either; hope its not a new trend (the tool that checks the quality of articles that are part of a specific Wikiproject hasn't been working for a while now either) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:42, 12 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've added Tilden (of whom I'd previously never heard - interesting article) to the List of British architects - worth remembering if you're going to do any more architect biographies. Shame about Tim R, with whom I had an entertaining lunch a few months ago. Best. --GuillaumeTell 17:00, 13 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Haha, thanks for that, only the couple of bits of vandalism so far, but it is only 9 o'clock! Hope your doing OK. -- CassiantoTalk 08:06, 18 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DYK for Philip Tilden[edit]

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:03, 21 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ahem! I think that you've mixed up Burges's Thomas Nicholls (, who appeared in London directories of 1900, with Thomas Nichols ( who didn't. And let's not forget William Grinsell Nicholl ( Best. --GuillaumeTell 20:44, 9 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Military history coordinator election[edit]

The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the projectwhat coordinators do) 09:19, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

William Burges TFA for 2 Dec...[edit]

Hi, I saw the Burges has been proposed for the main page on 2 Dec and took another look at the article. The referencing mechanisms can be significantly simplified and made more flexible. I've made a few edits and will finish up over the next day or so. This will cut thousands of characters of repetitive ref-markup, making the text in the editbox much clearer. It will also automate the collation of duplicate footnotes. Enjoy, Br'er Rabbit (talk) 12:44, 10 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for letting me know Jack.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:03, 10 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ma'af; no slight intended. Looking, I see that you've hundreds of edits into this article, too. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 14:31, 10 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well lucky to get TFA within this year eh KJP? Cardiff Castle??♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:51, 11 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Remember to take a screenshot on Dec 2 and frame it on your wall!♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:54, 11 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(watching, also I was the one to make the suggestion) you don't need a screenshot, simple take Main page history, there's one every day, here's my favourite, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:59, 11 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm developing a new main page design proposal, User:Dr. Blofeld/2012 main page proposal. And look at the TFA!! .♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:54, 17 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looks great. Best of luck with it. And roll on 2 December| KJP1 (talk) 05:04, 21 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm eager to begin on Cardiff Castle some time.♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:24, 21 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My Dear Doctor, yes, I am sorry. The demands of a new job and a new puppy have rather extended my wikibreak beyond that originally planned. And I go on leave in a fortnight. Hopefully I'll be better placed in November. In the interim, I'm ploughing through The Grand Designer, the new Bute biography, which will give us plenty of material. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 05:18, 29 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cool. User:Sionk seems local and interested in architecture, he might be interested although my recent run with him was not not initially exactly fully amicable.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:17, 8 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cardiff Castle...[edit] promised, I've gone through and done some expansion work on it. I've left a note on the talk page. Hchc2009 (talk) 19:06, 4 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nadolig hapus[edit]

Merry Christmas! When you said busy didn't realise you meant unable to edit!!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:03, 28 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, I'd ask around!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:45, 28 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Thank you! Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:56, 28 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Wyndcliffe Court, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arts and Crafts (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:28, 29 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Archive box..... that way →[edit]

All done. When you want to archive in the future, go to the search bar and type in "User talk: KJP1/Archive 3". Open up two screens on your computer; one of the "User talk: KJP1/Archive 3" page and the other of your talk page. Once searched, "User talk: KJP1/Archive 3" will be a red link. Click it open and go back to your talk page and copy and paste all threads you want to archive on your current talk page into "User talk: KJP1/Archive 3". Hit save and add the name - "User talk: KJP1/Archive 3" to the archive box in the edit screen of your talk page. Failing that, give me a shout and I'll happily do it for you. CassiantoTalk 15:30, 1 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]